Tokyo Trial (2016, miniseries)
Came to know about this miniseries through an article that highlighted two shrines in Japan in which an Indian judge's, Radhabinod Pal, is feted. Monuments are placed in Yasukuni Shrine and the Kyoto Ryozen Gokoku Shrine in his honour. That kindled my curiosity. My research finally brought me to the 2016 4-episode miniseries on Netflix.
Like the Nuremberg trials, a tribunal was set up in Japan to try Japanese military leader, former Prime Minister and his ministers for their involvement in the Second World War and the inhumane manner in which their subjects in their occupied territories were treated. Over 2 years, 11 judges, all linked to the victorious Allied Forces, presided on the fate of the Japanese war 'criminals'. Judges from Australia, New Zealand, the UK, USA, France, Netherland, France, Canada, the Soviet Union and China were the initial selection. The Military Supremo General Douglas MacArthur, who was the coordinator of the whole exercise, decided to add some Asian flavour by including judges from India and the Philippines at the last minute.
The 28 Japanese accused were slapped with 55 charges on crimes of peace (Class A), conventional war crimes (Class B) and crimes against humanity (Class C).
From the outset, Justice Pal, the frequent absentee from many of its meetings, categorically disagreed that the accused should be charged with any crime at all. At the time when the aggression happened, the law criminalising war did not exist. Hence, to charge the defeated on a new law was victors' justice in his mind. The territorial disputes and the bombing of Japan was conveniently pushed under the rug.
As the tribunal proceedings continued, it can be seen there is a desire by the aggrieved countries to put Japan responsible for its actions.
An exciting presentation that highlights the complicated nature of war. The victors' atrocities and imperial ambitions are conveniently categorised as necessary for the conquered. It is not seen as an intrusion or acting as a challenge to the sovereignty of a nation.
As in all disputes, the wealthy, the influential, and the loudest will win any argument. Justice takes a backseat.
The Indian representative is highly regarded in Japanese society as he remained steadfast on the Japanese side from the word go. He agreed there was aggression on the part of the military, but how much the leaders could be held accountable for their actions is a bone of contention. What can a person do if his views are not well received by the majority? Is he also equally guilty? This and many such thoughts are questioned in this show—a good one 4.5/5. 👍
P.S. Irrfan Khan reprises the role of Justice Pal.
https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson
https://www.facebook.com/groups/riflerangeboy/!
Came to know about this miniseries through an article that highlighted two shrines in Japan in which an Indian judge's, Radhabinod Pal, is feted. Monuments are placed in Yasukuni Shrine and the Kyoto Ryozen Gokoku Shrine in his honour. That kindled my curiosity. My research finally brought me to the 2016 4-episode miniseries on Netflix.
Like the Nuremberg trials, a tribunal was set up in Japan to try Japanese military leader, former Prime Minister and his ministers for their involvement in the Second World War and the inhumane manner in which their subjects in their occupied territories were treated. Over 2 years, 11 judges, all linked to the victorious Allied Forces, presided on the fate of the Japanese war 'criminals'. Judges from Australia, New Zealand, the UK, USA, France, Netherland, France, Canada, the Soviet Union and China were the initial selection. The Military Supremo General Douglas MacArthur, who was the coordinator of the whole exercise, decided to add some Asian flavour by including judges from India and the Philippines at the last minute.
 |
| Justice Radhabinod Pal (acted brilliantly by Irrfan Khan) |
The 28 Japanese accused were slapped with 55 charges on crimes of peace (Class A), conventional war crimes (Class B) and crimes against humanity (Class C).
From the outset, Justice Pal, the frequent absentee from many of its meetings, categorically disagreed that the accused should be charged with any crime at all. At the time when the aggression happened, the law criminalising war did not exist. Hence, to charge the defeated on a new law was victors' justice in his mind. The territorial disputes and the bombing of Japan was conveniently pushed under the rug.
As the tribunal proceedings continued, it can be seen there is a desire by the aggrieved countries to put Japan responsible for its actions.
An exciting presentation that highlights the complicated nature of war. The victors' atrocities and imperial ambitions are conveniently categorised as necessary for the conquered. It is not seen as an intrusion or acting as a challenge to the sovereignty of a nation.
As in all disputes, the wealthy, the influential, and the loudest will win any argument. Justice takes a backseat.
 |
| The Venue. Formerly Japan Imperial Army HQ |
P.S. Irrfan Khan reprises the role of Justice Pal.
https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Comments
Post a Comment